Robot Mule Put Out To Pasture By Marine Corps (nbcnews.com) 153
An anonymous reader sends word that the Marines have decided that Boston Dynamics' robotic pack mules are too noisy to use. NBC reports: The massive robotic mule developed by Alphabet-owned Boston Dynamics won't see combat with U.S. Marines. LS3 (Legged Squad Support Systems) was meant to carry cargo for weary soldiers in the field. Funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, the robot was capable of walking with 400 pounds of equipment on its back. LS3 could run for 24 hours straight on a 20-mile mission across rough terrain. No controller was needed; it took visual and verbal cues from soldiers to find its way. So why doesn't the Marine Corps want to use it? The robot's gas-powered engine isn't exactly the stealthiest piece of technology.
For your consideration (Score:1)
Goat [google.com]
Thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Still in use. Same with horses in specialty situations.
Hell, goats (well, mules) are still used for postal delivery stateside... http://www.cbsnews.com/news/special-delivery-mail-by-mule/ [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Vote goat.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
and thus the goathound was begat!
It has a really great personality...
Well Researched Story (Score:2)
The "article" such that it is, is not much longer than the Slashdot "summary". Any chance of some editorial work on these "stories"? More linkies?
Taxpayer dollars (Score:3, Funny)
what's wrong with real mules? (Score:4, Interesting)
20 miles for 24h with 400 pounds of weight? Sorry, but those specs don't sound all that great compared to a real mule or pack horse.
Re: (Score:2)
While watching the video I thought this looks just like a horse. Even the feet (hooves) looked identical. So to your point, why not bring a horse or two to pack the gear. Just let it go or shoot it and make burgers once the mission is complete.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:what's wrong with real mules? (Score:5, Interesting)
Bioengineer a horse that can eat MREs and you'll have a quiet (but smelly) alternative to this robot.
No need to bioengineer, nature has already provided such horses. "She was fond of a wide variety of foodstuffs, entertaining the platoon by eating scrambled eggs and drinking Coca-Cola and beer. Food could not be left unattended around her. She was known to eat bacon, buttered toast, chocolate bars, hard candy, shredded wheat, peanut butter sandwiches and mashed potatoes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Quite simply the mule no longer serves a purpose. The modern front line military persons chief role will be the intelligent application of close range drone weapons. The soldier will peak from around corners and behind walls, as they direct aerial mines at each other, exploding glide capable (required for range), quad copter drones, launched in close support and a design rate of one per enemy combatant (the more you make the cheaper they become). Launched from the air and ground in mass numbers each soldie
Re: (Score:2)
Quite simply the mule no longer serves a purpose.
I am not sure which mule you speak of - living or robotic. I linked this above so you'll probably not see it:
http://olive-drab.com/od_army-... [olive-drab.com]
The US military still uses animals for carrying stuff and for transportation - they've done so fairly recently. Google has a bunch of other information - if you're curious.
Re: (Score:2)
The [payloads], come in by the truck load, or a large cargo plane release them at altitude behind lines...
Sorry, but you seem to have entirely missed the original point of this robo-mule, which was that there are mission areas that are not truck-accessible and in which the enemy has anti-air capabilities that make large cargo plane drops impractical and dangerous. That class of mission area hasn't gone away, it's simply that the mission isn't helped by a running lawn-mower engine alerting all the enemies that you're trying to drag in a bunch of heavy equipment. Probably this class of mission will now be servic
Re: (Score:1)
At risk of being pedantic, you're not absolutely correct. If the mule (or horse) was limited and could *only* carry it's own food then they'd have not used them for years and years as a pack animal. I forget which episode it is but either War on the Eastern Front or Soviet Storm gets into some of the math and it's viable to use a mule or horse for a period of time that's longer than this thing runs on batteries and the number of batteries that it can carry.
Is there a finite time that the animal can maintain
Re: (Score:2)
While watching the video I thought this looks just like a horse. Even the feet (hooves) looked identical. So to your point, why not bring a horse or two to pack the gear. Just let it go or shoot it and make burgers once the mission is complete.
Horses require a lot of care and feeding. You can keep the mechanical mules in a warehouse until needed, parachute them in, then let them sit in a pile for a few weeks until ready to use them, then just gas them up and go, any time day or night.
Horses need infrastructure and logistics to house, water, and feed them.
Re: (Score:2)
So does complex robotics. The latter also requires large supplies of replacement parts, specialists, to fix them, and special facilities where they can be fixed.
Send in a few modularized repair kits - if one breaks and you can't fix it in 5 minutes by sliding in a replacement part, then kick it to the side and send it home later for repair by specialists and use the spare robot that you've brought just for this reason.
Yes, robot repairs can be complicated, but you don't have to do complicated repairs in the battlefield. But you've still got to have staff take care of livestock 24x7 if you want them to be ready to deploy.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't fill the coffers of the defense industry.
Re: (Score:1)
www.google.com
"In general, a mule can be packed with "dead weight" of up to 20% of its body weight, or approximately 90 kg (198 lb). The average equine in general can carry up to approximately 30% of its body weight in "live" weight, such as a rider."
On top of that considering a mule can be frightened by explosions and other combat conditions, and you need to potentially worry about food/water/shelter versus cramming a robo-mule into a crate at a warehouse when you're done with it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, bfpierce could feed a lot of donkeys for that price, and so could you or I. However, for that price, we cannot easily keep a small number of highly-trained donkeys on the other side of the planet well-fed and well-rested and capable of reliably hauling the necessary loads in a battlefield environment and operating to military standards.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting a mule to march for 24 hours straight.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting a mule to march for 24 hours straight.
Horses can be more reliable. "... in a single day, she made 51 solo trips to resupply multiple front line units. She was wounded in combat twice ..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That's an exceptional horse, do you have a way to clone her?
Re: (Score:2)
That's an exceptional horse, do you have a way to clone her?
Like human Marines cloning is not necessary. Just careful selection from the overall population. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
You'll find more human beings capable of being marines than horses with the qualities that you need. That's why I used the word exceptional.
Re:what's wrong with real mules? (Score:5, Informative)
Well, the US Army used mules regularly until 1957, and they're still used occasionally in special operations. The Marine Corps still conducts training in handling pack animals at it's mountain warfare training center.
Pack animals do make sense in limited situations, and mules are superior to horses in those situations because they require less and lower quality feed.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't generalize (Score:2)
A horse has.
FTFY.
While that's a cool fact, do you have any data to suggest that many horses can do this (and that mules can't)? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that your example is an exception rather than the rule.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A robot has the advantage of not needing breaks or feeding. Plus it would be much easier to transport to where it was needed. Just crate it up and put it on the transport. And when not in use the robot can be placed into storage while a mule or horse still needs to be taken care of.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't a mini-tank style design (with treads) work just fine for most applications? Make it semi-autonomous so it can follow soldiers around or be sent to destinations, could probably manage a heavier payload (because it doesn't need to balance) which means more fuel (greater range) and more applications. Could be used to carry wounded soldiers, etc. Also probably much quieter. The whole thing could be roughly snowmobile-sized.
Seems like having legs provides limited advantages when combined with the disad
Re:what's wrong with real mules? (Score:4, Funny)
So a deaf horse. Sheesh. I gotta do all the thinkin' round here?
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently not thinking hard, considering you still want the thing to actually be able to respond to voice based commands.
Re: what's wrong with real mules? (Score:3, Funny)
So you teach the horse sign language....
Re: (Score:2)
My horse reads lips.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm glad nobody told these guys:
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/l... [sonofthesouth.net]
Re: (Score:2)
War is hell.
Re: (Score:2)
No, ignorant panicky inbred horses that you've been around have are afraid of noises.
I've had multiple horses that you can shoot a rifle while on their back with barely a flinch from them. They do fine when they know what to expect.
Re: (Score:3)
Horses have worked well for the Marines ... (Score:2)
True, but real horses or mules tend to react poorly to gunfire.
Just like people, they can be trained and acclimated. Horses have worked out well for the Marines in the past, even in a completely autonomous mode.
"... Reckless was bought by members of the United States Marine Corps and trained to be a pack horse for the Recoilless Rifle Platoon, Anti-Tank Company, 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division. She quickly became part of the unit and was allowed to roam freely through camp, entering the marines' tents, where she would sleep on cold nights, and was known for
Re: (Score:2)
So do humans. Let's stop sending them there.
when the bad guys stops we will stop protecting your liberal ass.
Just use a better muffler??? (Score:5, Interesting)
Or, better yet, go with a small gas turbine, they're nearly silent, especially with a muffler, and can burn just about anything, diesel, gas, kerosene, you name it.
That's pretty damned idiotic throwing away a $30 million program because you didn't want to spend another few $100 on a muffler and some padding.
Re: (Score:3)
Honda generators are very quiet and extremely well-engineered. A favorite among the RV crowd.
http://powerequipment.honda.co... [honda.com]
Maybe Boston Dynamics engineers should get one of these and do some reverse-engineering.
Re:Just use a better muffler??? (Score:5, Interesting)
Stealth isn't only about sound, it's also about visual signature, heat output etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
*Sigh*
He didn't - try to read what people actually write. He stated that stealth isn't just sound and that is 100% correct.
Re: (Score:2)
Arguing about "stealth" as an abstract issue when the only identified issue with t
Re: (Score:1)
Certainly you could muffle the engine on that robot... with about 100 extra pounds of muffling gear that by the way will add to the size of the thing. Oh, and it has to be serviceable/repairable in the field.
As sibling said, it's also about the size of the thing, not to mention that a human can more easily move without being seen than a large and mechanized thing the approximate size of a horse (minus a head).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Sound insulation tends to hold in heat as well, so now you need the weight of extra cooling as well.
You need to think like an engineer. You can't add things in isolation. Every one thing you change has effects that cascade and change a dozen other things. It could be that all the necessary changes would make it too heavy.. Or make it too large... Or make it use too much energy... Or the expense of everything added and the studies needed to recertify it were prohibitive.
I don't sound like an engineer, Mr anonymous coward troll, FYI, PhD in Engineering Physics from Purdue right here, and I've been wrenching on engines since I was 5.
Its not a hard problem to make things quiet. Boston Dynamics solved the DAMNED HARD problem of walking, stability and self-guidance. Compared to these problems, adding a bit of quiet is trivial. Its clear from the videos that these are prototype mules, final versions would have had paneling, and would have used probably a more specialized engi
Re: (Score:2)
My guess is they just grabbed some farm equipment engine off the shelf to get a prototype together and didn't pay much attention to noise at this early stage, noise is an easy problem to deal at a later stage.
They probably used a lightweight two stroke engine like those used in snowmobiles. They are highly optimized and hard to improve upon with regards to power to weight ratio. Someone previously mentioned a small turbine - that could be interesting. Alternatively, a rotary engine is both more reliable and less weight - if you don't mind the extra fuel required. But regardless of the power source, making it quiet would not be as trivial as you suggest.
But your assessment is accurate. I doubt Boston Dyna
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's pretty damned idiotic throwing away a $30 million program because you didn't want to spend another few $100 on a muffler and some padding.
The technology isn't being thrown away. Boston Dynamics is a private company that does other things than just work for the military.
Literally all you need is a better muffler, and add some sound proofing covering around the engine, maybe adds 10lbs at most.
Then don't forget to add to mass manufacturing, technician training, water proofing, dust proofing, night-vision, river crossing, heat masking, rapid deployment/transportation, people carrying, part replacements, bulletproofing (to a degree), redundancy-systems, possible malfunctions, etc.
It's a huge commitment to mass manufacture and deploy new technology like this. I am glad
Re: (Score:1)
It's pretty idiotic spending $30 million to replace a cheap, working technology like actual mules.
Re: (Score:2)
I assumed it was to maintain a high enough power-to-weight ratio.
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
LS3 could run for 24 hours straight on a 20-mile mission across rough terrain.
So this thing averages 0.833 mph in rough terrain. For context, the giant galapagos tortoise can move at speeds ranging from 0.23mph to 1mph.
Now imagine 230 galapagos tortoises, each as noisy as a lawnmower and as terrifying as war itself, charging over a hillside in beavis and butthead masks.
Re: (Score:3)
rough terrain, as in rocky and steep. I doubt the tortoise could manage much faster. I doubt the humans are moving much faster on the rough terrain they are speaking of.
BigDog runs at 4 mph, climbs slopes up to 35 degrees, walks across rubble, climbs muddy hiking trails, walks in snow and water, and carries 340 lb load.
http://www.bostondynamics.com/... [bostondynamics.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I guess that is the wrong robot, but if the Marines don't like the LS3, why not go with big dog, they are roughly equivalent.
Re: (Score:1)
The idea is not bad, but not thought to the end: Imagine a thousand or ten thousand of those things with some kevlar in front of them and an automated shooting gun on top charging through an area where an enemy force is assumed to be. It's a zerg rush with guns, automatically targetting anything of a certain temperature and pulse, or where a enemy shot came from.
You probably could even deploy them from air, have them organise themselves and then start to charge.
Stealth won't matter. Lives lost on your side
brotha, can you spare any crystite? (Score:4, Funny)
You idiots. (Score:2)
Re:You idiots. (Score:5, Insightful)
Impressive Robotics Work (Score:2)
I remember watching Boston Dynamic's BigDog demonstration, and being thoroughly impressed by the robot's ability to maintain balance and regain footing when kicked or slipping on ice [youtu.be]. That said, the video also demonstrated exactly the Marine's concern, but I thought that they'd be able to reduce hardware requirements and increase battery efficiency to the point of overcoming the gas engine requirement. I guess that battery efficiency (and requisite durability) just hasn't gotten to that point yet, or gasoli
Re: (Score:2)
>> I thought that they'd...overcom(e) the gas engine requirement
Why make changes? The check cleared. I guess that's what we get for watching the demo with the sound off.
Re: (Score:2)
This was the first working version that they created. Remember the first computers were the size of a room and not very fast.
The problem is they need a market for this in order to refine it and make the necessary modifications.
Re: (Score:3)
First, it's easy to opportunistically refuel a gasoline powered engine. And fast.
Not so much with batteries.
As well, the energy density of Li-on batteries is very low compared to gasoline (44.4 mj/kg for gasversus .36-.875 mj/kg for battery).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Consider that the battery pack on a Tesla S comes in at 1,200 pounds or so:
https://my.teslamotors.com/for... [teslamotors.com]
That's for about 250 miles of travel.
Gasoline weights about 8.3 pounds per gallon. The equivalent weight results in 144.58 gall
Re: (Score:2)
Fuel cells?
Re: (Score:2)
This is a nonsense comparison, based on theoretical numbers which conveniently ignore the very low efficiency of converting gasoline into movement, and the substantial weight, maintenance, etc., required to do so.
If you compare complete systems, like yard equipment, automobiles, etc., it's easy to see that batteries are (at worst) within an order of magnitude of the capabilities of ga
Re: (Score:3)
They probably don't want to rely solely on batteries because it would take a long time to recharge. Fuel cells might provide a solution in that it could be easily recharged. It wouldn't be good to get halfway through a trip, have the batteries run dry, and then need to wait for them to recharge.
mule needs a muffler (Score:1)
Not News: Robotics company doesnt know how to make internal combustion engines.
There are dozens of ways that automotive engineers over the years have decreased the decibel output of internal combustion engines.
None of these improvements go into generators. Ive watch some youtube videos of the 'Mules' and it looks like a robot with a generator on its back.
They're probably using generators because noise was never a stipulation in the design parameters. What a bunch of idiots. Cancel a program because
it does s
Re: (Score:2)
Those small Honda inverter gensets barely purr, but they likely need a better power to weight ratio. So basically it's waiting for a better power source... Paging Mr. Stark?
Mission choice? (Score:2)
Better ideas? (Score:1)
Other market opportunities... (Score:1)
Alternate uses for the technology.
1. A bomb that can wait near an expected target site, then run over and detonate when commanded to. Basically, a drone that can hide in the bushes.
2. An military-grade electrical generator or hardware hauler that can simplify setting up a forward base with limited access. Alternately, a civilian-grade heavy generator that can be walked into areas with limited access.
3. Military swarm-scare-monster, as described somewhere above in the comments. It could be sent into caves t
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Too noisy. Now they figure that out! (Score:2)
The first time I saw the "Big Dog" as it was called back in the early days (2008?), I made that comment immediately. It's a remarkable piece of robotics, but it can't be used on a mission. The enemy would hear you coming from miles away. So what is the point? The device doesn't fit the application.
And now, 7 years later they finally figure that out. Wow!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How smart you must be! Too bad that this didn't work out but that is common for military use of civil technology, otherwise a modern army could make use of cars or that thing the British invented for WW I but were much to loud to be of any use - the so called tank.
Really... This thing was created as a way to transport goods in places where humans can go but not traditional vehicles. Do you really think stealth is the most important factor in all situations? If so read my in-jest text above until your brain
Use a Fuel Cell?? (Score:2)
While I don't see Fuel Cells as being very viable for Cars compared to a Lithium Battery, they might serve a good application in this place considering now you neither care about the cost of fuel (or excess CO2 emissions) but the fact that it is silent technology. The downside is you would still need to carry around bottles of Hydrogen Fuel which is explosive although probably not much worse than ammunition or fuel. And while admittedly tanks aren't exactly silent, they do have a point if this is suppose
Multiple Use Labor Element (Score:1)
Simple (Score:2)
God damn you idiots. Make it electrical and just have 3 soldiers carry the battery.
Re: (Score:3)
>> humvees with a 50cal on the roof
To be fair, the 50cal is pretty quiet until it fires. :)
Re:It'll get a new job: rescue & firefighting (Score:5, Insightful)
With its payload capacity, it could probably carry 40 gallons of water, that could make a big difference for a wildland firefighter.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flatland tasks are best suited to a vehicle. Other tasks are well-served by a robohauler, a pool NOT identical to tasks best served by a live pack animal. Unless you're one of the dumbfucks below who see absolutes and exclusivity instead of partial overlap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No all supply missions require stealth (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, and I'm guessing this is all sour grapes.
Google doesn't do military applications. They bought Boston Dynamics and have told the military that they are not going to do any more military research. So, the military said, 'Well, we don't want it anyway, because it's too loud'. That gets Boston Dynamics out of the business and lets the Marines save face.
Re: (Score:1)
You, my friend, have never driven an HMMWV.
However, you're probably right. I doubt it has the range and carrying capacity. That doesn't mean it doesn't have other useful applications but it does mean the HMMWV isn't going anywhere any time soon. If you get the chance, even the original civilian models aren't bad, then you absolutely will love it. If you work, really hard, then you can get it stuck. However, with some ingenuity, you can extract the vehicle with a second vehicle or all by itself.
Block and tac
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
a ditch of certain size will get the humvee stuck. it will not fit between two big rocks either. that's why the soldiers would have been walking in the first place.
the soldiers don't like walking though so there you have it, the reason why they don't want it. if it's silent the excuse will be that they might get walked over by it because they can't hear it. the first excuse was that the gear was too heavy. so they'll keep going in oh so stealthy blackhawks.
Re: (Score:2)
You, sir, have most obviously never been a soldier, and speak shit.
Re: (Score:1)
I'm afraid he must not know any Marines. We'd move the rocks and bridge the ditch if needed. If there's a few things a few Marines and a box of spare parts can get accomplished it is both explosions and landscaping work. We have an entrenching tool. In fact, pretty much all of us have one.
A ditch or a rock? Heh... Yes. That's gonna stop a bunch of angry (or bored) Marines - dead in their tracks and they'll have no idea how to proceed. ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
In the Foreign Legion missions in Chad and the Central African Republic I participated in, we had the French-produced VLRA [wikipedia.org] for rough-terrain driving. The thing is incredibly rugged, and actually has a Perkins engine, initially built for small ships (!!). It features such niceties as a 200 liter water tank behind the rear axle, a compressor outlet for inflating tyres, and (as customized by the Legion) a pump between the two lateral fuel tanks. The enormous reserve wheels, one besides the driver and one on th
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the HMMWV is famous for being able to run on booze - it's a story every soldier around the world knows. The VLRA can't do that, although it can run on kitchen oil; we never did that, as the smoke production is enormous. A Legion driver, having run out of fuel close to home after crossing a desert, was once ordered to pour the engine's oil into the tank. The VLRA reached home, sure enough. The thing has only very minor weaknesses. One of them are the standard issue, much too weak bulbs in the head ligh
Re: (Score:2)
No.
The Jeep requires something resembling a road, or at least reasonably flat and unobstructed land.
This robot can walk across things a Jeep simply can't.
The robot horse can walk in the woods, up and down hills that are too steep/rocky/slippery for a Jeep, all sorts of things.
Quadrupeds are far more versatile than cars, we are just way better at making cares than quadrupeds (for the moment)